DIPUL TALUKDAR Vs. JOYNAL ABEDIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petition which has given rise to this appeal, was filed by the two writ petitioners, the respondents herein, questioning the list prepared for adjustment of 81 Lecturers against sanctioned posts of different Govt. aided colleges on the basis of the office memorandum providing for such adjustment applying the related criteria. The learned Single Judge by the impugned judgment and order recording the particular stand of the Govt. that the particular clause in the office memorandum has become redundant in view of enactment of the Act in question and thus cannot be impleaded, has held that the issue in the writ petition has become infructuous. However, opportunity has been granted to the aggrieved parties to make independent challenge to the above stand of the Govt.

(2.) IT is in the aforesaid backdrop, the present writ appeal has been filed by 59 appellants who were party respondents (got impleaded in the writ petition ). In fact, their names were included in the list of 81 candidates which had the due approval of the Govt. in the concerned department. As stated above, in the writ petition, the claim of the two writ petitioners was that the list was not prepared maintaining the seniority which deprived them of getting their services adjusted against the sanctioned posts.

(3.) WE have heard Mr. A. S. Choudhury, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. I. Hussain, learned counsel for the appellants as well as Mr. B. Rahman, learned counsel representing the respondents No. 1 and 2/ writ petitioners. We have also heard Mr. V. M. Thomas, learned Standing counsel, Education Department. We have also considered the materials on record in its entirety and have given our anxious consideration to the same.